tv [untitled] June 26, 2015 12:00am-12:31am PDT
úx >> here we go. good afternoon aerobic wn. i would like to call this meeting to order. this is the reg yaerm scheduled meeting of #4r57bd use and transportation meeting. to the my left is kim and supervisor cohen [inaudible] our clerk is mrs. andro[inaudible] i also want to recognize jessie washington and jerffer low with
sfgtv. >> please silence [inaudible] weal appear on the june [inaudible] less otherwise stated >> thank you very much madam clerk. i would like you to call items 1 and 2 together >> item 1 is planning code to acknowledge approval of ricon hill streetscape master plan and item 2 is general plan of ricon hill >> after supervisor kim gives opening remarks we'll here frum paul nob nub from the planning department >> i think i still need to add my names to item 1 and 2 as a sponsor but would like to make opening comments. as many know the rin con hill area plan was adopted back in 2005. it fsh the first major area plan adopted by the planning department since the 1990's
down town and south of market plan. in response to had changing economy 6789 it was row zoned from a industrial area to mixed use residential area that we see today with a growing number of residence. streetscape and traffic changes were a int rugle part of the planning process to plan for residence and workers coming to inneighborhood. the area is hat the base of there bay blij with surroundic streets as strafic ways. traffic and pedestrian safety continue to be a priority as the pop ulation grow squz the computer traffic increase as well. former industrial street patterns provide a-redesign streets and help come in line with our vision zero policy reducing traffic faytalities in san francisco. a huge issue for the neighborhood. the ricon hill images streets
around rin conhill as a important part of the cities open space and urban environment with limited opportunity for the park. [inaudible] spear, main and beel. a focus on harrison street for traf nob fol strm street through western sell mu and improve pedestrian condition at free way ramps. we are working to make sure sthra seemless relationship between the transbay area plan and transbay terminal and want to invite paul [inaudible] to present in better detail >> thank frz vg me. i am paul [inaudible] i want to give a
brief presentation. i don't really need to go through the summary because spl visor kim eloquently summarized it that the key thing here is the plan is in process for a long long time and glad to be adopted it today. 2 moreb recent legislative items that happened. nob nab approved by the mta board [inaudible] in 2006 and last munt we took it to the mta board to make legislative tweaks to up date it. the planic commission 96iated march 5 and adopted march 25. we had a lot of letters to support, around 30 or so for the 2 items. the 2 things you doing today rks you are making-the planning code has language saying, if the plan is adopted baize there was
a draft written, if a plan is adopted implement the plan and if not work with the department to implement the draft provision. we [inaudible] and the policy and area plan which is a compoint on thof general plan says create a [inaudible] we say implement streetscape plan. just background and context. like supervisor kim mentioned, the plan is 2 plan areas that are next to each or. the rin conhill area in blue and to the north along folsom street is the transbay redr. development area and because a lot of the north side of folsom and moving between main and beel toward market street used to be parcels that embarcadero freway, it made sense to redevelopment [inaudible] through a different planning process. we have more tools
and more piblic bft like affordable housing. for this type of policy the neighborhood was divide into 2 planning areas, however when we have done the planning for rin con hill and transbay we try to make it a seemless neighborhood so folsom street [inaudible] the north south streets we have design guidelines in the rin conhill and transbay process that will make them feel like one seemless integrated series of spaces. so, these tr the streets that are rin con. the red lines are in the transbay area. the purp line is harrison and north is market street, folsom street is redone by the redevelopment [inaudible] formally known as
redevelopment. main, beale and spear are the green side walk squz the intent is to show they double as open space and fremont and [inaudible] from the alleys are the light green streets more residential and open space like [inaudible] so, just to walk you so you can see harrison street, the typical features in the plan including generous [inaudible] on the plan and the [inaudible] you is a 30 foot side walks, those become a pedestrian plaza. here are xhmps of the [inaudible] streets and they intended to function as open space because there wasn't a lot of open space so the wide side walks enable to create open space pods, the generous nooks programmed for activies like sitting and walking you dog. the free way access streetss, freemont and first street are similar to the
[inaudible] for a walkable space accept the [inaudible] are more generous and we have--and then [inaudible] some of the residential alleys, [inaudible] moving forward as a shared street. here is a sneak peek of the dephrine. we are excited about this and worked closely with sitdy apartments to advance the design [inaudible] hopefully set a precedent to allow the projucts to move forward and want to thank supervisor kim in her leadership in mubing the project forward. this map is washed out. this is a map of where the [inaudible] are in the plan. sinls the plan was initially adopted there use today be a [inaudible] on harrison street which is removed. it used the parking lane as a [inaudible] taken away the bus line and added [inaudible] that is sth treek the mta board approved. the [inaudible] them sevlerize bigger than the standard
[inaudible] and also have space for greenery or [inaudible] or street furniture. the plan gets in to material such as [inaudible] and just in general we see a lot of development coming forward. this is the pipeline. the legend is off the maf map. the pichck projecterize projects active and the purpp 8 with ones already done thmpt light pink are project comes to play and some are out of date, number 11 for example, is moving forward as is number twelf t. is important we adopt this plan because it gives a important tool to work with developers to make sure we get the public realm they are required to do. briefly on the-there is impact fees that fund a lot of infrastructure that goes flow a [inaudible] which done through
the city capital planning process and upidated. here is the funds in the process now. some of the funded projects are [inaudible] we are funding harrison street through this project and [inaudible] here is photo of [inaudible] and places that have already been funded. folsom street isn't in the rin conhill plan areas but it is next door and we work very closely. i want to give a sneak peek coming to folsom street. folsom street was going to be 4 lane street but because of vision zero we convert today a cycle track. initially it was a 3 lane street with a cycle strack and innew design called for 2 lane street and cycle track which will make it much safer.
[inaudible] that is a summary in the plan. if you have any questions i want to thank you >> thank you for the presentation and would like to get a copy, a electronic vergz of it. i just had 2 question, one is what you brought up with the additional [inaudible] on harrison street which i'm very excited about with rerouting of 12 and folsom. this is a question of the planning memo. i know that folsom going eastbound currently turns and goes toward china town. i get i'm curious about the change from harrison street. i didn't understand what the exact change was >> yeah, so can i get the computer back? so, to answer your question about the [inaudible] basically the city
has [inaudible] we prioritized harrison street based on community street as highest priority. part of that because the upper-er right touches all the neighborhoods. it is also a vision zero street. we will build harrison street and bull [inaudible] to the future dimension. here is a image of harrison and spear and on the left side of the image there is a much wider side walk. when we build the bull bout we'll build the curb line to the 30 foot side walk and return it to what it is now. in doing that we reduce the cost of the other streets and also close up the intersection squz make them much much safer as a pedestrian safety thing. to answer your other question, the mta used to run a bus on harrison street
and because of the >> one east bound and one west bound? >> yes-it was before i worked with the city so apologize-there was a pmt transit only lane getting on the bay bridge would slow down the bus so the parking would disappear and there was a bus only lane. mta removed the bus during budget cutss and now adding the bus back and worked with them to design [inaudible] essentially because there was a bus only lane we couldn't have [inaudible] when the plan was written because the bus would crash in the [inaudible] and make trouble, but now that the bus is removaled we were able to add bull [inaudible] to the street >> this is just east of second street? >> yes, >> i can scthis question because our residence have a
very legitimate concern they spressed to us and mta which is none of the east west bus s in the south of market go past second street. they have been pushing mta to push the buses to go more east because there are not buses in that area. i'm curious whether the bull bouts will get in the way of the advocacy work >> mta took away the bus and the neighbors are unstandbly upset [inaudible] we worked with them on the new bus, where the new bus goes in and they are but putting the bus back so we made sure the bulbs we put in here will work with the bus >> great >> because folsom street is 2
way and also has a lot of housing, especially more affordable housing and it is a flatter street, the bus is 2 way on folsom >> if the buses can go 2 way on folsom street which i know we are working through to see if we can fit a 2 way folsom street. i bow there is a conversation about howard and folsom being one way [inaudible] i think that would rectify or take care of that need. harrison isn't the only cor dor a bus needs to go downfelt i just want to make sure the bull nob nub don't white out the possibility of a bus being on that cor dor if we need it to be >> otheast of folsom it is open table and the central soma plan [inaudible] west of folsom it is decided that mta decided they want the bus there 2 way on that stretch and we have amended the folsom design to
include transit island [inaudible] so it shouldn't be a problem on rin conhill >> i support the bull bout on harrison street. harrison street is probably the most unfriend liest. you have to walk single file so i'm glad to see we are doing the widening >> one final thing on that is harrison street isn't going to be built until folsom is done because for construction impact we don't want to shut down the 2 lane streets in the neighborhood, so if for whatever reason there was a change there is plenty of time to revisit that. in adopting the plan we are not lock tg in stone, we are setting a policy but the details can be worked out later >> what sth timeline for the folsom street streetscapeing for the rin conhill portion?
>> it is technically in the oci plan area so the timeline is something the planning department has very little control over but the goal is start construction in 2016 i believe and be done in 2017 and harrison street would start >> in mid2017 >> assuming folsom finishes on time harrison will start >> i know the neighborhoods would like to see that occur as soon as possible. i want reiterate the infrastructure financing district the board of supervisors approved in 2011 to make sure we are able to use that tax increment and the gap frz the open space and streetscapeing work we need to provide for this really growing nirbd. my second question is a small one and asked at the last community meeting at south beach harbor and was a concern
about placing trees between parking lots as a way of widening side walks on [inaudible] >> if i can get the lap top >> the concern is the city has nerve done this before. i believe we have but just want to clarify that >> the city has done this before and one example is [inaudible] in glenpark has trees in the parking lane and so-this is a image from there original plan. the original plan was written before the better streets plan so there was no shared street and the upidate added shared streets. all we did is lift up the cur when we updated the plan. there is a president in glen park and the better streets plan itself adopted by the board in 2007ish. that has a whole typology and call frd trees in the parking lane as a
strategy and in the cities tool kit >> the concern raised is a, the trees would get hit a lot and how do we protect them with the cars parking between and the second is-i don't have the answer, but whether the roots would come up about the side walk and impact that >> i can take a stab of those 2. this bar here, that is a wheel stop and then on the other side there is this little dot there, that scare thing is a balered that protectathize treez. also this parking space is a little more generous than a normal parking space. the final thing that is important to know about lancing street is when the 45 lancing project which is this parcel right here off the bottom of the map went through the planning commission because there are 3 [inaudible] they couldn't meet their open
space requirements so the planning commission required them in the condition of approval to build lancing street and man tain in permtuity. if a car bump synchronize to a tree thore roots came up and break the side walk, the development 45 lancing is responsible to maintain it. they are removing that maintenance responsibility from the property owners there are other property owners on lancing and assume it in perpetuity >> thank you so much. >> thank you very much mr. chanson. i would like to go to public comment. any member of the public who would like to speak on the item please come forward. seeing none public comment is closed >> i want to thank you the planning department for their work on this. this is a neighborhood that will support 10 thousand residence and so it is really important that we
create a complete neighborhood and i think we can't wait soon enough for these improvements to go in for open space and streetscapeing so that we can encourage our residence to walk safely and really build this healthy neighborhood we want to see. thank you for that. i bow there were a lot of delays on the plan partially due to had recession thoirfb past couple years but it semeing to see the development occurring in the neighborhood. very painful for the existing residence but in the long term i hope we are able to build this great neighborhood. i ask for your support and so i'll make a motion to move forward item number 1 and 2 with positive recommendation >> motion made by supervisor kim. could we do a roll call vote? >> roll call vote on item number 1, supervisor kim, aye.
supervisor kim aye. supervisor cohen? you have 2 aye. item 2, sfr visor kim aye and supervisor cohen, aye. both motions pass. item number 3 transbay transit center and compatibility >> thank you very much. supervisor kim is the primary sponsor of this hearing so would you like to make opening remarks? great, thank you. so this is a continuation of a item that we first heard in december of last year at the land use committee and it is
discussion on cal tran and high speed rail compatible boarding plan form. this is a imperative issue to solve particulary in right of the flexibility of the transbay terminal which is the northern most terminal for high speed rail and cal train. i know there are a number of meetings since our last hearing in december both between cal train tgpa and high speed rail to discuss how we can address the needs of different systems both in terms of what they would like to see in their vehicle fleet as well as their needs around boarding plat form. before cal train went out with the rfp the number one priority is lect fiication which is important. as you hit already over capacity and continue to
grow in ridership lect fiication is a key part to make sure we get the keys in and through the punens law fast squr board more individuals. cal train has done extensive research on the cost and benefit of plat form height serving both car manufacturers and staff on the height. the initial resunch shows the plat form cupatibleability is feasible but has a series of trade off. last friday at the transbay authority meeting the board adopted a rez dugz to encourage high speed rail that allow for compatible plat forms for both systems so they can use the transit centers 3 different plat formsism we have constraights unsan francisco as well as i imagine in mill bray. we are limentded in land so can't just build more tracks.
that may be a option in san jose but it is important that as we build here with our limited land supply we are able to come to agreement that insures platform compatibility. i didn't to invite today to discuss this further as casey [inaudible] and david [inaudible] from cal train. we do also have lieuese [inaudible] from sftca and do see members from the planning department as well. >> while that is getting loading thank you for having us today. as supervisor kim said we were here in december of last year and did a lot of work
fraul high speed rail because we heard this is a important issue to explore to see if there a way to have cal trains new electric vehicles not proclude future compatible boarding height with high speed rail. we went through a 6 month process and we owe it to this committee and others to report on the progress so everyone can see where we are moving forward on this process and have the board make a policy decision next month on this topic. so, without having the powerpoint here i can just verbally talk about the issues. [inaudible]
>> do you also scr have copies of the presentation for the committee >> i don't. i thought the committee took care of that last week >> usually you bring in copies. maybe you can see if we with get them printed from the clerks office. you said you e-mailed it? >> i did e-mail it last week >> to? >> tfs who was accordinated with this group. >> why don't we continue with the presentation and if the
clerks office can bring a copy they will do so >> i will get start would the presentation which is also available on the cal train website. we start with a few context slides to understand where we are with the system and where we are going in the future and white the decision is sewer important thcht first is the average ridership. cal trains had a dramatic increase. p since 2004 it is 144 increase. that is when the babefy bullet was introduced and the cal train system become competitive with vehicles. this slide we are over capacity on both north and south bound cht we highlight thd north bound slide here and you can see in the low season it sup to 1thry 5 percent and in the high season it is much higher than that. the next slide shows-this is what it looks like on the system with that type of cupsty and these
pictures are not of giants games when it is higher than that, this is just a regular day on the system in both direction. we have variety of different customers riding the system from people bringing on bikes to people going to and from work and the ada passenjure. for the average rider they are on the cal train system between 20 and 28 miles and on between 30 and 50 minutes. when this compares to other systems in the bay areas, for bart muni and [inaudible] passenjures are on those systems for less time than cal trains. for ace it is a commuter rail system and it more so cal train is in the middle for what the riders experience and how long on the system, but when we look at the future for lect fiication we have to keep in mind will the system look more like bart and muni and [inaudible] or ace